Can I kill 'restrict anonymous'?
Gerald (Jerry) Carter
jerry at samba.org
Sun Nov 11 21:45:01 GMT 2001
On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> Correct, and this is the way the code now works. The 'guest' flag on
> the vuser (and the server_info) is only set if and only if the user
> either: a) did not provide credentials or b) was 'mapped to guest' by
> that ugly hack in the session setup code. Both of these are purely
> anonymous as far as this is concerned.
>
> In HEAD, we no longer compare unix uids to determine 'guest' status, and
> an authenticated user with that uid is not treated as a guest.
If the auth rewrite in HEAD broke "restrict anonymous", then we need to
fix the original intended behavior or remove the parameter. However,
in no way would I agree with replacing the intended behavior and
implementing it with a new parameter. :-) Make sense?
Change under the hood is good, but change the interfaces a little
as possible (smb.conf in this case) and only if absolutely necessary.
cheers, jerry
---------------------------------------------------------------------
www.samba.org SAMBA Team jerry_at_samba.org
www.plainjoe.org jerry_at_plainjoe.org
http://www.hp.com Hewlett-Packard
--"I never saved anything for the swim back." Ethan Hawk in Gattaca--
More information about the samba-technical
mailing list